Intel Tests Smallest Spin Qubit Chip for Quantum Computing

Look at the pencil, wait for it - yes there it is! Intel researchers are taking new steps toward quantum computers by testing a tiny new "spin qubit” chip, smaller than a pencil’s eraser, it is the tiniest quantum computing chip Intel has made.

A 2018 photo shows Intel’s new quantum computing chip balanced on a pencil eraser. Researchers started testing this "spin qubit chip” at the extremely low temperatures necessary for quantum computing: about 460 degrees below zero Fahrenheit. Intel projects that qubit-based quantum computers, which operate based on the behaviors of single electrons, could someday be more powerful than today’s supercomputers.

The new spin qubit chip runs at the extremely low temperatures required for quantum computing: roughly 460 degrees below zero Fahrenheit – 250 times colder than space. The spin qubit chip does not contain transistors – the on/off switches that form the basis of today’s computing devices – but qubits (short for "quantum bits”) that can hold a single electron. The behavior of that single electron, which can be in multiple spin states simultaneously, offers vastly greater computing power than today’s transistors, and is the basis of quantum computing.

The zigzag lines in the photo are printed wires connecting the chip’s qubits to the outside world. One feature of Intel’s tiny new spin qubit chip is especially promising. Its qubits are extraordinarily small – about 50 nanometers across and visible only under an electron microscope. About 1,500 qubits could fit across the diameter of a single human hair. This means the design for a new Intel spin qubit chip could be dramatically scaled up. Future quantum computers will contain thousands or even millions of qubits — and will be vastly more powerful than today’s fastest supercomputers.

lol even to Americans, that number doesn't really mean much.Also, where are they getting "250x colder than space"? The temperature of space is 2.7K or -270.45C. As Picolete pointed out, the temperature Intel's chip needs to operate at is 5.37K or -267.78C. I don't think any of these temperatures are exponential.

WareTernal
Senior Member

Posts: 242
Joined: 2013-09-27

#5557162 Posted on: 06/14/2018 05:59 AM

Also, where are they getting "250x colder than space"? The temperature of space is 2.7K or -270.45C.

Good point. The statement "250 times colder than space" seems like a really bad choice of words. "Space" doesn't have a temperature, so that's that."Cosmic background temperature" is -455F so that's not it."Interstellar gas clouds" are "thousands to millions of degrees Fahrenheit" so maybe that's what they meant.I'd say the marketing guys are laying it on a little thick...

NaturalViolence
Member

Posts: 66
Joined: 2009-10-01

#5557281 Posted on: 06/14/2018 12:44 PM
Good point. The statement "250 times colder than space" seems like a really bad choice of words. "Space" doesn't have a temperature, so that's that."Cosmic background temperature" is -455F so that's not it."Interstellar gas clouds" are "thousands to millions of degrees Fahrenheit" so maybe that's what they meant.I'd say the marketing guys are laying it on a little thick...

Space contains particles, which have kinetic energy and therefore a temperature. The average temperature of space is 2.7 K.

RealNC
Senior Member

Posts: 2674
Joined: 2011-11-24

#5557398 Posted on: 06/14/2018 07:43 PM

Also, where are they getting "250x colder than space"?

Stop trying to make sense out of PR statements :p When was the last time a PR statement wasn't either random BS or random platitudes?

Edit:I see what they mean. That chip is near absolute zero. That is indeed actually 250x colder than the 2.7K temperature of space. 2.7K / 250 = 0.0108K. Which is -459.65F. So it's actually correct, not BS.

WareTernal
Senior Member

Posts: 242
Joined: 2013-09-27

#5557440 Posted on: 06/14/2018 09:59 PM

Space contains particles, which have kinetic energy and therefore a temperature. The average temperature of space is 2.7 K.

I do understand what you are saying, and I said that myself - "Cosmic background temperature" is -455F". This is indeed what they are referring to, and I admit you are correct regarding what Intel meant. I guess I'm arguing about symantecs. Technically, I am "particles in space", and I have a temperature just a slight bit higher then 2.7K. You're talking about the temperature of cosmic background radiation - not "space".I still think they could have worded it more clearly and still had a sensational sounding press release, but I admit my own ignorance of the Kelvin scale is what caused my confusion.

That is indeed actually 250x colder than the 2.7K temperature of space. 2.7K / 250 = 0.0108K. Which is -459.65F. So it's actually correct, not BS.

Thanks for this! Now it does make some sense to me.

Now how long until they use this for a GPU?

Post New Comment

Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.